Welcome gentlemen,This "Guide" aims to achieve an environment that shifts the gameplay into realistic and historical correct lanes. The designers & programmers aimed for the most realistic and historical correct environment with the way the game works, its maps, OOBs, scenarios, leaders, etc. and so the player himself should not stop but continue on that road.

I also hope that a generally agreed set of optional rules, under the premise that you aim for what fits best to history, will help to find opponents faster as one can resort to these instead of trying to chose rules that are beneficial just for one side without taking a look at how it worked in real life.

While some rules sure lead to arguing because they themselves don't sound very realistic the overall effect & purpose still is realistic & historical correct and that is what's important.

***Manual Defensive Fire - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It makes a PBEM much longer by adding several phases within each turn that need mail exchanges but this is necessary because phase gameplay handles defensive fire at 100% and not at 50% like in turn gameplay. In turn gameplay the defender is simply too weak to stop assaults but phase gameplay makes the defender much more likely to hold his position like it often happened in the Civil War. So the benefit it that the phases force a much more historical gameplay and with that historical results while some gamey tactics possible in turn gameplay are banned.

Optional Fire Results - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. The long turns(20 minutes) would make the results of a firefight more predictable because even if some greater variations occur in some volleys they even out in the overall course of the firefight. Besides that unlike the Napoleonic times the muskets had evolved from a smoothbore flintlock muskets to a percussion lock rifled musket that fired a Minié ball, overall these modern muskets raised the precision but also the reliability and so that would make extreme high or low fire results less common.

Optional Melee Results - OFFI currently recommend to turn it OFF. The melee in the “Civil War” series can be, unlike the Napoleon series, seen has the pure hand to hand combat or the attempt to conduct hand to hand combat, this comes from the fact that a unit that's disrupted can't do it and holding back fire will only result in a 10% bonus in the melee. Now the hand to hand combat could produce a variety of outcomes because either it was conducted as the defender stayed to fight or it was not conducted because the defender retreated before actual hand to hand combat happened.This demands a broader range of results what is achieved by turning this rule OFF. Also from a historical perspective the less predictable results would fit better because it can on one hand turn the player away from conducting melee in fear of a bad result but on the other hand also turn him towards melee in the hope of a good result.

Quality Fire Modifiers - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Quote from the user manual:"The rule is meant to reflect the more efficient and higher rate of fire that higher quality units were capable of, and the corresponding lower rate of fire that lower quality units generally had. Units with experience were able to keep their guns unjammed during a hot battle, even to the point of having slightly smaller caliber bullets on hand to use after their guns had become clogged from burnt gunpowder. Lower quality units could not sustain high rates of fire due to their inexperience and poor training. They also had poor habits such as sometimes inadvertently firing their ramrods at the enemy and thus reducing their ability to fire. For the same reason, higher quality units were more proficient with the use of the bayonet and thus the justification for the Quality Melee Modifiers Optional Rule."This justification sounds logic, although it does not count for artillery units.

Higher Fatigue Recovery Rates - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Although the quote from the user manual states this:"In the game, Fatigue is used to represent combat fatigue, not the physical state of being winded. As such, the physical effects of combat fatigue are felt long term and do not wear off through simple rest. In many Civil War battles, the end of the battle was determined by fatigue and not by losses. In larger battles, commanders had to be careful to rotate their fighting units and not commit any one force too long to battle. Having higher Fatigue recovery rates would permit the unrealistic ability for commanders to rest units for short periods of time and then recommit them to battle, something that was not common historically."The quoted text is not really correct, there were often a so called "lull" in a battle were the fighting ceased and the units got some rest. What's more important, the generally in most games used rather low recovery rate is so low that it's not in any way considered by the players and by that it has no impact on their decision how to conduct the battle. That usually means the forces meat, fight like mad all day long without even a single turn of pause and end up not only high fatigued but also with high casualties.Now if higher fatigue recovery is used it gets a factor that has an impact on how the battle is conducted. Players need to consider to break off engagements in time so units stay low in fatigue what is quickly recovered, or players continue the assault despite units running into the high fatigue range what will take them proportionally much longer to recover from. That will lead to less combat and less casualties what seems more realistic Also the way higher recovery works mirror's the fact that once a units had too much, meaning it got into the high fatigue range, it needed serious & long rest and not just a break to catch some breath, units that were handled with care and that had only small skirmishes over the day, meaning they did not run into the high fatigue range, recover their fatigue rather quickly as it did not impact their moral all that much.

Victory Points for Leader Casualties - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Quote from the user manual:"Every rule must be evaluated for what it motivates players to do. In this case, awarding points for leader casualties motivates the player to hide his leaders away from the battle to avoid losing Victory Points. For example, the player would never risk a good leader like Lee in the front line for fear of losing Victory Points and would keep him carefully hidden away in some safe place. Conversely, players would be motivated to focus their fire primarily on hexes containing leaders in hopes of picking up Victory Points. Having this rule as a default rule would skew the battles away from the historical outcomes in a way that would detract from the games as learning tools. Given the tactical nature of the battles, losing Lee for example is felt even in the absence of this rule since his replacement, and all replacements in the line of command, will generally be of lesser quality than the original leader and thus this will have a detrimental effect on the Confederate Army."Besides this justification one must also consider that the endless throwing of replacement leaders(especially those of brigades) into the battle to achieve combat bonus is also punished by this rule. Every leader that is lost is replaced by a replacement leader even a replacement leader himself, this goes on endless but with this rule their loss will now cost VP. Besides this no VP for leader losses would ignore the long term effects of losing precious leaders in a campaign, what goes much beyond a single battle.

Rout Limiting - OFFI currently recommend to turn it OFF. Quote from the user manual:"The routing logic causes the rout of a single unit to sometimes spread to adjacent units and so forth in a way that can have a major effect on a force. Establishing the correct balance in this logic is a matter of interpretation. If you have a large rout occur, check the following factors that affect morale. Did your units have High Fatigue? Were they Low or Out of Ammo? Were they of mediocre quality? Was it a Night turn? Experience has shown that game players conduct their attacks with far greater aggressiveness than was ever shown on the actual battlefield. Historically, leaders were very cautious in the commitment of their troops and were careful not to keep units in battle for too long for fear they would not hold. If you have just had D quality units, low on ammo, with Fatigue level 900, rout during a Night turn, don't think that this was an unrealistic event."So this forces the player to use his forces in a "cautious" way like leaders did back in these times and not to throw the troops careless at the enemy like it's World War 1. It also leads to the use of historical battle formations by leaving room between attack columns to have them not interfere each other. It may look a bit harsh at times but besides the mentioned things the player can take precautions to not let routing spread to other units by placing leaders as "speedbumps".Overall the player should not be reassured of his line but rather insecure by this rule to make him behave historical.

Density Fire Modifier - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Seems likely that the more the hex is stacked the less chance exists to miss the enemy, his ranks are too closed and hits may even cause multiple casualties.One can argue that with the stacking limit in the Civil War series at 1000 this rule already comes into play from 666 men and beyond. This means that already a "full" regiment of about 1000 suffers under this rule especially with the more effective weapons of this time.But there is no pass through effect(like in the Napoleonic series) where firing on one unit would also lead to casualties in other units in that hex. And one must consider that the average size of a regiment in different battles throughout the Civil War was almost always far blow 1000, an example is "Numbers and Losses in the Civil War in America" by Thomas Livermore concludes that federal regiments averaged 560 at Shiloh; 650 at Fair Oaks; 530 at Chancellorsville; and only 375 at Gettysburg. None of them would have been affected by this rule.Overall the stacking should be punished, also from a game perspective as these monster stacks must come at a price or else the use of them would be the rule and not the exception.

Night Movement Fatigue - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It sounds logic and is based on the PDT data entry and so may or may not be generally used just like the scenario designer intended it.

Mounted Cavalry Skirmishers - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. I can imagine that cavalry would/could send some scouts and so scout ahead even when mounted. Also it plays out the role of cavalry as reconnaissance unit better. One must consider that the engine shows enemy’s only up to 2 hexes while on the move, this could lead to bumping into enemy units what would be unrealistic in case of cavalry.

Higher Disrupted Movement - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. The higher flexibility of Civil War formations compared to the Napoleonic time and their so called "skedaddle"(run away hurriedly) would likely allow a higher rate of movement even when disrupted. Besides that some Napoleonic games/scenario already use 2/3 disrupted movement and I don't see why it should be slower in the CW series.

Optional Melee Resolution - OFF(For Phase gameplay, works only in Turn gameplay)I currently recommend to turn it OFF. First it works only in turn gameplay, but phased gameplay should be preferred. Besides this it also seems bugged as this additional phase can lead to fatigue recovery if nothing is done by a unit or nothing done to that unit, according to the manual this should not be possible. Even if it does not work in phased gameplay it should be turned off to prohibit any interference.

Alternate Fixed Unit Release - OFFI currently recommend to turn it OFF. The standard line-of-sight release function seems enough and the possibility of surprises is kept. Players might actively seek to open lanes of advance to trigger the release of fixed units premature and without taking a risk of them being surprised, also because fixed units would work as some form of early warning radar as a release means that the enemy is within 5 hexes, all this is prohibited by turning this rule off.Also a fixed unit will likely simulate a unit that is not ready for combat for various reasons or that doesn't even guard its perimeter and so it deserves the risk of being surprised and the need for it to be guarded by other units.

Quality Melee Modifiers - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Quote from the user manual:"The rule is meant to reflect the more efficient and higher rate of fire that higher quality units were capable of, and the corresponding lower rate of fire that lower quality units generally had. Units with experience were able to keep their guns unjammed during a hot battle, even to the point of having slightly smaller caliber bullets on hand to use after their guns had become clogged from burnt gunpowder. Lower quality units could not sustain high rates of fire due to their inexperience and poor training. They also had poor habits such as sometimes inadvertently firing their ramrods at the enemy and thus reducing their ability to fire. For the same reason, higher quality units were more proficient with the use of the bayonet and thus the justification for the Quality Melee Modifiers Optional Rule."Just like with the “Quality Fire Modifiers” this justification sounds logic.

Isolation Rules - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Quote from the user manual:"This rule is intended to have two effects.Commanders were always very cautious of their flanks. They often withdrew from a position before they had been overwhelmed simply because their flanks were threatened. This rule is intended to motivate the player to think in these terms. Secondly, units that had been surrounded would often surrender and not fight to the death. The 1/4 modifier to defending strength is intended to reflect the tendency of the Isolated units to surrender when pressed."Here again the player is forced to care about his flank and his line of communication. On a grand scale no WW2 encirclement's happened in the usual open field battles, if such is wanted the scenario designer usually takes care of it with a supply source to allow holding out even when encircled. Historical considerable measures were done to extend the own line and keep the line of communication open. It also reflects the officers tendency to see doom with an enemy in their flank or back, this simply doesn't raise the fighting spirit but achieves the opposite and makes the officers act to prevent such situation at any cost.Same counts for the soldier on a smaller scale, a unit would try to deny the enemy their open flank or even back, if the unit was cut off and encircled it did not raise the fighting spirit but but achieved the opposite.

Weak Zone-Of-Control - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It seems likely that moving into the firing arc of a unit would cause some effect but with this rule active still only one hex movement inside the enemies zone of control is allowed, that seems enough impact on the movement. Besides this the defender will surely fire a volley of defensive fire and can spoil the flanking move of that unit by this. It also counters the isolation rule a bit as it leaves room for small maneuvers.

Partial Retreats - OFFI currently recommend to turn it OFF. Quote from the user manual:"Retreats from a hex by units that have just lost a melee are necessarily very chaotic events. Certainly with a breakdown in command and morale, it would not be possible to find some optimal displacement of units that would just fit in the retreating hex. A good analogy would be a burning building where quite often a large number of people perish even though there are exits readily available. The dynamics of this situation is known as "choking" and results in greatly reduced flow through openings. Based on this, there is justification for concluding that obstructions to their retreat would often result in the surrender of the defeated troops rather than some optimal reduction."At first it seems that two points points speak for turning it on.1. The optional rule "No Melee Eliminations" from the Napoleonic series is missing in the CW series, that opens the way for wiping out whole stacks.But this is only a problem if the retreating units have no empty enough hex to retreat to, what can only happen if the defender formed an initial defensive line without providing the proper space to retreat. This seems more like WW1 trench warfare(I admit that this has to be reconsidered for late war titles like Overland where there is trench warfare).2. The optional rule "Multiple Infantry Melees" from the Napoleonic series is missing in the CW series, that opens the way to attack infantry multiple times.But this is only a problem if there is at least one unit in a target hex that did not melee in that melee phase, what only happens if the defender did not provided proper space for a retreat, still there is the need that another attacker is in contact with the hex that the unit retreated to and that he is bale to conduct melee.

Both points seem to count only seldom and only if the defender uses a rather unhistorical tactic of constantly max stacking his line, this should be punished by turning this rule off.It should also not be forgotten that the overall advantage is with the defender and that melee can only happen if the attacker comes in contact with the defense line without behind disrupted. Also the stacking limit is usually at 1000 men what is far above the unit sizes of many units especially later in the war.

Automated Defensive Fire - OFF(For Phase gameplay, works only there)I currently recommend to turn it OFF. There are some problems with this rule.1. Despite the fact that the fire done by ADF can be roughly adjusted using the Auto DF Dialog, there is neither a chance to exactly set the range nor to turn firing off. This can lead to wasting ammo what hampers the Confederates more as they are usually shorter on ammo and most of the time are the defender in a scenario.2. The AI does no optimal job in choosing the targets for the defensive fire, by this the defensive fire is less effective, again it's often important to bring the fire onto the most dangerous unit of the attacker.Overall the waste of ammo and the less effective defensive fire leads to the conclusion to do the defensive fire manually.

Flank Morale Modifier - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It seems likely that a unit with support on the right and left side is more sturdy and assured in its position compared to a unit that stand alone or is at the end of the line.

Full Melee Defensive Fire - OFF(For Phase gameplay, works only in Turn gameplay)I currently recommend to turn it OFF. It works only in turn gameplay, but phased gameplay should be preferred. Even if it does not work in phased gameplay it should be turned off to prohibit any interference.

Bridge Limit and Repair - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Limiting the capacity of damaged bridges is simply logical, just as it's logical to be able to repair them.

Artillery Capture - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. Capturing artillery was a common thing in the Civil War, and especially the Confederates raised their number of artillery pieces by capture.If the players worry about being forced to “occupy” the enemy artillery unit the whole time to achieve the full victory points both players should agree on a simply giving full points for each to that player who either possesses the battlefield after the battle or simply based on the current “frontline”.

Artillery Retire By Prolonge - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. As artillery was already able to move prolonged at the time of Napoleon it only seems logical to allow this in the Civil War.

Artillery Ammo by Cannon - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It seem this higher detail in depicting ammo would raise the realism so it should be used.

Proportional Opportunity Fire - OFF(For Phase gameplay, works only in Turn gameplay)I currently recommend to turn it OFF. It works only in turn gameplay, but phased gameplay should be preferred. Even if it does not work in phased gameplay it should be turned off to prohibit any interference.

Mixed Organization Penalty - ONI currently recommend to turn it ON. It seems not unlikely that units from different brigades could hamper each other when being to close together(in the same hex).***

So this is it, hopefully it will help players to chose the best optional rules for games closest to history because that can very well be a problem without extensively examining the rules and wrongly chosen rules may very well ruin any fun in the game not to speak of the silly unhistorical outcomes that can happen.

Thanks for taking the time to list the options and to give your recommendations and reasoning. Some of these options have been discussed and I think someone addressed optional rules in the same manner several years ago. I want to say it was General Whitehead, but I'm not sure. I agree with most of your conclusions but certainly not all. Still, a worthy topic of discussion for the Tavern.

Manual Defense Fire ON but with Automated Defense Fire also ON.This gives you what I consider the more realistic Civil War combat without slowing down PBEM. The computer resolves the defensive fire phase fire. While it may not pick there targets we would have it does a relatively good job and we probably have to much control over combat anyway. It does create a problem for the Southern player because of their limited ammo and limited control over its use when these are ON. But cutting mailings in half more than makes this worth while.

High Fatigue Rate Recovery ON.I like this for multiday battles because it reward players who actually take the time to pull units that are gaining to much fatigue out of the battle line and letting them rest. Under normal fatigue recovery rates it is almost impossible for a unit to recover from fatigues over 300 so players tend to fight their units until exhausted then use them to hold VP objectives or other rear area duties. In the Civil War general made a point of pulling such units out of the line and letting them actually rest. High Fatigue Rate rewards players for doing this. If a regiment is pulled out of the line before it hits 600 and before dark it has a high probability of fully recovering by morning of the next day. Those above 700 usually require a full day and night to recover. A general who takes the time to manage his fatigue will be rewarded with more active troops on the second and third day of long battles.

When this option isn't ON I rarely see any attempt to pull fatigued troops out of the line until they route at max fatigue level (900).

Alternate Fixed Unit Release ON.Here we see the problem of the 70 foot general. Most players know exactly where the fixed units are and game them if this rule is left OFF. I have surrounded entire divisions at Shiloh when players decide this rule should be OFF. Having the five hex release forces the players to keep their distance until they want to advance through the area containing fixed units.

Ah I had mixed up the ADF paragraph, had to correct this.Was the only change for 1.01.

@KWhiteheadRegarding ADF:I agree that we have to much control over combat but that also counts for the attackers. The defender has to make the most out of what he can what is only possible if the player does it manually. Also as Union player I think that it's a good concession to not use it so that the Confederate can make the most out of his defense and his ammo.If we could only adjust it precisely I would surely go for it.

Regarding High Fatigue Rate Recovery:That's an interesting observation but the problem I have is the in my view too high recovery. It's 5 times for normal and 3 times for medium fatigue, and in my test it clearly showed how fast it can go down. While the rotation to rest troops is nice, I fear that this leads to a much higher casualty rate as the units are very quick back in action, where this can end over a multi day battle I don't know but I would guess its' more realistic to have the army exhausted after multiple days of battle instead to have it unfatigued but melted in numbers like they just went through the Somme offensive.Maybe if the rates were lower like 3 for normal and 2 for medium I would go for it, I had also thought about an opposite approach giving the high & medium range higher rates but leave the low range at normal so that the player always has to deal with a low fatigued unit.

Regarding Alternate Fixed Unit Release:Well I can hardly imagine that players usually know where to find the fixed units of their opponent unless they have purposely check the other side before the game started, if this was done and also exploited with gamey tactics I would drop such players from my list there is just no reason to play against such persons. It makes no sense to adjust the rules to make it harder for cheaters and at the same time make some things like surprises impossible, I would rather leave the possibility for a surprise and don't play a cheater at all.Shiloh seems a special thing as the Union side is purposely fixed to allow a Confederates to surprise the Union, that would be impossible if the rule is ON as the Union units would unfix long before the Confederates get through the woods to make contact.Again I would prefer this rule to be changed, first the range of 5 hexes is not enough as that is already within rifle range, personally I would go for 10. And the skirmishers could be used as to unfix a fixed units if its skirmishers make contact with an enemy unit or enemy skirmisher. That would finally also give the skirmisher function some justification for its existents because currently it's useless 99% of the time.

On ADF - I agree but doubling the length of games will make any battle lasting more than one day almost unplayable with all the extra emailings. Having ADF on to speed up turnaround is a sacrifice the Rebs have to make to keep the games playable within our life times.

High Fatigue Recover Rate however I strongly support. The normal recovery rate is so low that it is pointless to try to use it. I find most players just go all out until a unit hits 900 and even then they may continue fighting the units under the assumption that the enemy's units are probably the same way too. This leads to heavy casualties and complete undoing of the purpose of fatigue.

With the High Rate on, a player that pulls his regiments out of line to rest during the battle will be rewarded for better managing his fatigue. While it is true most units can recover over night this way, it actually only occurs if the player takes the time to watch his fatigue levels and not over fight his men. Once a unit reaches about 800 fatigue it will not recover sufficiently to fight again even in a three day battle. The High recovery rate will encourage players to actually handle their troops more like they were in the Civil War. They won't fight them as long before resting them. The actual casualties will probably be lower than the alternative of fighting with exhausted units.

Fixed Release using the five hex rule I also strongly recommend. If you are playing me I know where they are. I have played these games to many times for both sides to miss guess by more than a hex or two. Shiloh is a problem because the fixing wasn't to reflect late release times in the actual battle but to implement the surprise attack. But it is easily gamed by the Rebel player who uses the fixed rule to keep brigades in place while they attack to surround them.

An alternative to using it is to put in place some player rules to keep things from getting ridiculous. Most games of First Manassas I ask that the two Rebel regiments left on the wrong side of Bull Run not be surrounded. If the Union player wants to attack that ford they should first move down the two trails and activate those regiments. Other scenarios could be handled the same way but I think the optional Fixed Release rule solves these kind of problems in most cases.

Regarding ADF:Well a lot depends on the players too, I currently have one that is able to send numerous mails a day, it's a constant back and forth over some hours, overall we surely get as many turns done as we would with ADF. But yes if you have an opponent that returns just 2-3 mails a week and doesn't speed up even if he has nothing to do in his phase, then you really have a problem finishing longer scenarios.One thing seldom considered here is to play online. There isn't so much difference watching the replay or watching the opponent doing his turns live, he is surely slower than the replay but without the need to send mails and no delay in doing my phase when he is done with his phase you can even be faster than with ADF. What can be achieved in some hours online may not be achieved in same days doing PBEM.

Regarding Higher Fatigue Recovery:Fatigue should definitely be taken into account by the players. If they think recovery is useless and keep their units at the enemy no matter how high the fatigue is, then this may indeed lead to higher casualties as a lull in battle seems unlikely to happen unless the armies rout away from each other.

What worries me is they very high recovery on low fatigue, I can imaging brigades having 1-2 regiments at the enemy while others are behind resting and after a while positions are switched, all the units constantly dwell in the low fatigue segment and dish out casualties by fire without being effected by fatigue because they can recovery very fast in that fatigue segment. I'm not sure if that would lead to lower casualties as constant fighting could still happen besides the possibility that the lines aren't extended but shortened what would be against what usually happened.

What I also don't like is the recovery rate of 3 times in medium fatigue and 5 times in low fatigue. I just did a test with the 1st Bull Run scenario were all units had max fatigue and I used the higher recovery rate OR. The first unit recovered fully at the start of turn 39(of which 9 were night turns) what is about 18 hours and 40 minutes but the worst unit is still at 666 fatigue, this shows how drastic the fatigues levels can differ if the much higher rates kick in at lowered fatigue levels. Average recovery is currently at 423.3875.

Question is, do we really need the higher rates of the OR at the medium and low level or would it be better to adjust the recovery rates in the PDT to a level where the recovery is similar high to the average result of the OR but with a more linear recovery?

Besides this I haven't tackled the combat fatigue topic from the psychological side, maybe there is something to consider that justifies the OR and its none-linear recovery. Maybe someone can contribute to this point.

Regarding Fixed Release:The problem I still see is that not just one side but both can take a gamey approach to fixed units, if not using that OR the one that attacks could encircled them, but at the same if you use that OR the one that has them can expose them in the hope of a premature release especially if with this rule ON no line of sight is needed.What should also be considered is the scenario itself, I just did 1st BR and there I have 2 brigades are fixed for the complete scenario but that seems to speak against what really happened. So there was the chance for a gamey approach to these brigades, but that problem lay in the scenario itself and not in the OR that was used, that chance would disappear as soon as the scenario is fixed.I still hope that players do not exploit their knowledge so far as that it has to be seen as gamey and so would keep the possibility of surprise.Taking Shiloh again, what happens if I use that rule and all union units are unfixed before the Confederates are even close?A surprising first strike by the Confederates is impossible that way and I'm not sure if that would be good for the scenario.

By not using ADF are you not losing the ability for your units on defense to fire multiple times as enemy units advance on your position or cross within in range or LOS? By not using ADF its possible for enemy troops to advance on you across open ground and end the turn in covered terrain or even out of LOS without taking a shot. I'll take my chances on ammo depletion for a chance at more shots even at 50% strength. You should be able to manage your ammo wagons to offset low ammo issues. The full defensive fire before melee was asked for and added to give more "oomph" to the defense as well.

By not using ADF are you not losing the ability for your units on defense to fire multiple times as enemy units advance on your position or cross within in range or LOS? By not using ADF its possible for enemy troops to advance on you across open ground and end the turn in covered terrain or even out of LOS without taking a shot. I'll take my chances on ammo depletion for a chance at more shots even at 50% strength. You should be able to manage your ammo wagons to offset low ammo issues. The full defensive fire before melee was asked for and added to give more "oomph" to the defense as well.

I haven't verified the settings but I believe if you have the game in "Turn" mode ADF setting has no effect since "Turn" mode handles all defensive fire as Opportunity Fire with movement the only thing triggering it. Which is why I avoid playing in that mode.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum